Danoff, you have already proven your inability to understand basic mathematics, obviously something with words or a graph in it is impossible for you to get.
Like i already stated, what I am saying can't logically be argued against, there is the proof.
You're proof is a random Wikipedia link, which from your post can't really explain 1/4 of what is there. Not to count the fact you already have a biased chip on your shoulder by clearly calling out the republicans...so the dems haven't done anything to also hurt the economy and market...I mean Clinton and NAFTA hasn't really made things all that great. How about acutal proof and then you wont have posters making you look like some kid that got his U.S. history book today from your High School bookstore.
^
Here is more proof what I said won't be logically challenged...
Taxes, banking regulations and wealth distribution all started changing in a couple years, yet no one can understand one is a result of the other two.
Oh, homonyms...
At the end of the debate, it was decided that democratic elements of our newly founded governmental system would be strictly limited by the founding document. Despite wide-ranging views, the most of those old men knew that pure democracy is a crazy idea.Democracy is the road to socialism.- Karl Marx
America loves socialism, even Tea Party mugs like social security and medicare.
Remember this is just the Democrat party, the group of people that denounces science, booed soldiers (Code Pink), and then applauded ACORN and the unnecessary death of a millions of unborn children through gov't funded abortion. This group of morally destitute people only accounts for 1/4 of the population.
Agreed so deeply.
The majority of them have no clue whatsoever and will follow blindly, just like the hardcore D&R's do. It's a shame that independent thought isn't more common in people. They are just like the Obama'ers from the last election that voted for the words 'hope' and 'change'. That I actually agree with. The mob rule aspect of democracy does go a long way towards making the lower classes seek equality. You can only crap on someone for so long before they tire of it. Too bad a Utopian society is just fantasy at this point, as TRUE Communism(utopia)-(not Socialism) will likely never exist except in fictional writings due to man's inherent desire to get one up on someone else. I don't agree with the practice of wealth redistribution, but in principle, there is no reason that anyone who contributes to society should be made to go without. To me, the clerk at the gas station is just as important as the policeman or pilot. All of these jobs are needed, so there is no reason one should starve and scrimp by while the other dines and lives extravagantly. I am on quite the opposite side of the argument from you, but I do acknowledge the intent and thinking. The mixed capitalist/socialist/oligarchy that we have in this country ensures that neither side (Lib or Com) will prevail or have the chance to prove itself any time soon. Socialism is something that has always interested me in that way, I feel the theory is strong but the true application will never be seen.Democracy is the road to socialism.- Karl Marx
America loves socialism, even Tea Party mugs like social security and medicare.
FTFY
Right, you haven't responded to the facts. And I'll tell you again, I am not pro democrat.
My point initially was the bottom started getting crapped on more starting around 30 years ago, well, that is only if one thinks highly of statistics and empirical evidence. FTFY
I agree, dude.
http://web.hks.harvard.edu/publications/workingpapers/ci tation.aspx?PubId=6695
Dapper reminds me of Luxemburg, i think this partially explains his concern.
www.marxist.org/archive/luxemburg/1900/reform-revolution/index.htm
Could be wrong though. I read a lot of stuff for fun
edit: link is wack, it's reform and revolution from 1900.
- Milton Friedman said it was okay to go entirely off the gold standard, and Nixon did it. We can now reach the orbit of Pluto merely by printing stacks of money.
- Milton Friedman said it was okay to deregulate business and reduce the unions, and Reagan did it.
- Milton Friedman said it was okay to invent exotic, unconventional financial instruments like derivatives & CDS's, and Wall Street and government regulators swallowed it hook, line and sinker.
- Milton Friedman said it was okay to indulge in virtually unchecked speculation and leveraging debt, and virtually everybody in the world jumped in it.
- Collectively, we decided that cheating on school tests was okay, so naturally we cheated on mortgage loan applications with the full assistance of the brokerages and banks.
Bottom line, I blame it all on the business cycle, bad luck and the current sitting President.
Respectfully submitted,
Steve
Note: by the term "Milton Friedman" I mean not just the man himself, but also the University of Chicago and all those academic acolytes of Friedman who so enthusiastically swallowed his Kool-Aid.
Did Keef edit in your conclusion?
I'll just add imo greed from all sectors exaggerates the highs and lows. Government interference that attempts to stabilize or minimize negative impacts only prolongs and expands on downsides.Dotini
Google Rosa Luxemburg reform or revolution. It's a 50 page document arguing revolt over social reform in a capitalist Germany.
.
Now you're going to focus on my grammar and not the issues? That's also fine if you find me that way, the others on this thread don't seem to have the same feelings, but you're entitled to that feeling of me. Next time I'll try not to type so fast when responding to post on the thread just for you
Because you agree with them.
You asked for legislation, but my initial response to anything banking was an article that was all about legislation. Feel free to go and read that at your leisure.
.
